On Monday, ahead of the November mid‑term elections, the US Supreme Court temporarily sided with President Donald Trump, allowing him to push forward tougher restrictions on the distribution of mail‑in ballots. Still, this does not mean the United States Postal Service (USPS) can immediately roll out the new mail‑voting system.

With three liberal justices dissenting, the Supreme Court stayed the earlier ruling issued by Federal District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston. That ruling had blocked the Trump administration from enforcing parts of a March executive order concerning the USPS and voter‑eligibility rolls.

Key Divide: “Whether the Policies Have Been Implemented”

In the majority opinion, the Supreme Court held that Trump’s executive order itself did not compel states to change election procedures. It only directed federal agencies to formulate policies that might impose requirements on states at a future date. Since these policies had not actually taken effect when challenges were filed by 23 states and Washington D.C., the court deemed the lawsuits premature.

The justices also stressed that this ruling does not guarantee the ultimate legality of Trump’s executive order or subsequent policies. The majority wrote that the outcome of this application “does not render any measures taken by the government to carry out the order necessarily lawful; time will tell on that point.”

New Postal Rules Still Blocked by Nationwide Injunction

Despite the Supreme Court’s partial green light, the implementation rules finalized by USPS last week cannot go into force. Designed to carry out sections of Trump’s executive order, these rules impose new requirements on ballot envelopes, barcodes, and information that states must provide to USPS. They remain subject to a separate nationwide injunction issued by Judge Talwani on August 11.

This means the Supreme Court’s decision does not immediately alter the practical mechanics of mail‑in voting. For the new regime to take effect for the November 3 election, the Trump administration must first overturn this nationwide injunction.

The Case Will Proceed on Appeal

With core legal disputes unresolved, the case has been sent back to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Meanwhile, several states are preparing to send ballots to military and overseas voters in early September, indicating legal wrangling over mail‑voting rules may continue right up until election day.

From market and policy perspectives, the ruling reflects heightened uncertainty over US election rules ahead of the mid‑terms. Although the Supreme Court has granted the Trump administration procedural leeway for now, the nationwide injunction remains in place so no material near‑term changes to mail‑in voting will occur. Further developments hinge on rulings from the appeals court and subsequent legal proceedings.